Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Case Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

    Rama Prasad Sarkar v. State Of W.B.

    1. The Central Bureau of Investigation (in short, the C.B.I) to be added as a party in this writ petition.

    2. Amendment to be carried out forthwith.

    3. The learned Additional Solicitor General states that he will be appearing for the C.B.I

    4. It is most unfortunate that both the Central Government and the State Government have refused to blink in this matter and are riding a high horse while the people in the Hills are being killed because of the disturbances, apart from the fact that food supplies to the hills have become scarce. Pursuant to our order dated 7th July, 2017, we have been informed that a meeting did take place between the officials of the State and the Central Governments. However, there has been no resolution regarding the deployment of Central Police Forces in the Hills.

    5. In the circumstances, we direct that affidavits shall be filed by the Joint Secretary, Police-II, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and the Additional Director General of Police, Law and Order, Government of West Bengal, who were both present at the meeting held with the Special Secretary to the Government of India, Internal Security, Ministry of Home Affairs, as the chairperson. The Joint Secretary, Police-II, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, must disclose, inter alia, in his affidavit the reason for not acceding to the request of the State for replacement of six companies with their counterparts as mentioned in our order dated 7 July, 2017. The State's affidavit must disclose their strength of State Reserve Force, which may be available for deployment in the Hills.

    6. Affidavits of both the aforesaid Officers must indicate what transpired at the meeting held pursuant to our order dated 7 July, 2017 and what steps the respective Governments have taken towards normalizing the situation in the Hills.

    7. We have added the C.B.I as a party respondent to this petition and the Additional Solicitor General is appearing for them.

    8. On the returnable date, an affidavit must be filed by the C.B.I disclosing the reason why no steps have been taken by the C.B.I to ensure the implementation of the order dated 14 December, 2016 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in C.R.M No. 5221 of 2015 and other connected matters. The Division Bench in those matters had directed that the accused persons must be present in Kolkata one day prior to the framing of the charge. As mentioned in our earlier order, we have been informed that the framing of the charge is in process and the accused are not present in the Court. It is difficult to accept that the charge can be framed without the presence of the accused. Therefore, the C.B.I must disclose on affidavit why they have showed such leniency to the accused and not bothered to ensure their presence while the charge is being framed.

    9. All affidavits to be filed by 13 July, 2017.

    10. List this writ petition along with other connected matters on Friday, the 14 July, 2017.

    Use AI to get other relevant cases.

    Comments

    Rama Prasad Sarkar v. State Of W.B.
    (Jul 11, 2017)